Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.16 AVERAGE
4.16 AVERAGE
This book is a lot to process. Authors like Arthur C. Clarke and Larry Niven probed the intersection between science and spirituality during the purported "Golden Age of Science Fiction," but Mary Doria Russell takes that exploration to new heights. This is a science fiction tale in setting, but it is a character-driven exploration of faith at its core. I can honestly say I've never read anything quite like it.
The author was raised in the Catholic church, but left at the age of 15 and eventually converted to Judaism. The Sparrow reads very much like the work of someone grappling with the evolution of her faith, and I mean that as high praise. The book stands tall on the strength of its convictions, and the questions it asks and concepts it grapples with create a web that is not so much tangled as intricately woven. This is not a book that provides easy answers, but one which presents you with the ruin of a life and invites you to explore the depths of a broken soul.
To say I was moved by this book is an understatement. I cannot say enough good things about it.
The author was raised in the Catholic church, but left at the age of 15 and eventually converted to Judaism. The Sparrow reads very much like the work of someone grappling with the evolution of her faith, and I mean that as high praise. The book stands tall on the strength of its convictions, and the questions it asks and concepts it grapples with create a web that is not so much tangled as intricately woven. This is not a book that provides easy answers, but one which presents you with the ruin of a life and invites you to explore the depths of a broken soul.
To say I was moved by this book is an understatement. I cannot say enough good things about it.
challenging
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal cruelty, Death, Gore, Rape, Sexual violence, Blood, Vomit, Grief, Cannibalism, Murder, Injury/Injury detail, Classism
This novel convinced me that I enjoy sci-fi. Great character development, I still think about these characters, and this book was published in 1996. The story revolves around an eclectic group and their first alien encounter. As you may have guessed, not all goes according to plan. - Paula C.
Giving this book 3 stars is a bit generous, overall I think it deserves a 2.5 I appreciated the link of philosophy/religion with sci-fi and the theme of religion in the modern age. However, I definitely think that this book would’ve been much better had it been done by another author.
Russell’s story and world building is good but I would argue she has little to no worldview on planet earth and tries to then bring her limited world view to address another entire culture. Which may have been understood and the point she was trying to make while writing the book, the crew was just a group of people who were trying their best to know and meet another culture as fate or God (depending on which character you asked) but I think it’s a misguided point. The reason I say this is because if you take time to read her Q&A towards the end of the book, she’s basically a colonialist sympathizer who wrote The Sparrow “to show how very difficult fist contact would be, even with the benefit of hindsight”, which doesn’t sound to bad out of context right? Except she is literally talking about colonists (who she refers to as explores) and missionary activities in the Americas. If we’re being truthful about the history of the Americas, it’s very simple to get that colonization was not “unintentional” like in the situation of The Sparrow, but deliberately thought out and organized to commit genocide against Native Americans. But it’s important to understand although Emilio and the crew’s intentions may have been wholesome and the basis of building community, their actions were completely uneducated and I would say deplorable because they’re all professionals with research experience, it is borne from the same ignorance and lack of understanding as the genocide of colonists. It takes one intro to research ethnics course, which again MOST of the crew has experience in at this point before they make their voyage, to understand half of what they had done on Rakhat was not ethical at all. Their crew definitely lacked a social science and a basic sense of curiosity that didn’t center themselves. But then again what would you actually expect of the Catholic church and missionary voyage?
Not to mention all of the shocking “issues” that they found on Rakhat that they did not know how to deal with, were already present on earth. So what did they go to discover really? History repeated with a new face, they should have known better, the crew did not even understand their own history or the systems from which they were brought up under. They were absolutely ill-prepared to deal with any of these realities, which isn’t cautionary tale that Russell thinks this is because it still always centers whiteness and is underlyingly coded in this ignorance and complacency.
In terms of the characters, personally, I didn’t identify or relate to any of the characters in the friend group. I found myself being very annoyed during the scenes where characters personalities are shown and “developed” I did not find Sofia wasn’t really giving a full personality, which is a shame, and I’m pretty sure if you counted all the times Sofia was mentioned in the novel by the other characters, about 65% of it would be about her physical appearance and wether or not she was going to end up with Emilio or Jimmy. Very tired of seeing being one of the bigger aspects in the characterization of young single woman, I would have liked to have seen more from her. Out of everyone I would say that I liked Emilio the best but it’s hard not to connect with a character when they’re the protagonist, that’s kind of the whole point of writing a story from someone’s lens. In terms those chosen to go to Rakhat, the entire crew lacked humility, especially within the context of being a first contact for an entirely new culture. This is where I think I start to fault the author over the characters because it is more indicative of the author’s perception and world view which I would argue is extremely limited and doesn’t bother considering life and culture outside of Euro-centric view muchless show any interest in doing so. This is where part of my main problem with the entire book is.
In terms of “finding God”, I think the idea around what God is really vague and a bit hard to follow for me personally but I understand that this is a Catholic perspective. As a religious person, it does hurt me to see how this pure trust and love for God that Emilio had ended up being perverted and exploited, which has been the case for many on planet earth. The weight of that pain and wondering if God can ever be found again after such a thing is a valuable story and I would hope that Emilio, as everyone else who has a story like Emilio can find that peace in faith again.
I have not read Children of God, nor do I plan to, for me this book was enough to understand what ideas Russell is basing her story off of, and it’s not something that is new or revolutionary or something that I am interested in.
TLDR; Russell has no concept of actual colonial history and centers the entire book around a selfish western human perspective. Which sets the overall themes of the book in a way she herself doesn’t really understand or get. It’s not a great book for this reason and would have been an interesting concept if done by someone else.
Russell’s story and world building is good but I would argue she has little to no worldview on planet earth and tries to then bring her limited world view to address another entire culture. Which may have been understood and the point she was trying to make while writing the book, the crew was just a group of people who were trying their best to know and meet another culture as fate or God (depending on which character you asked) but I think it’s a misguided point. The reason I say this is because if you take time to read her Q&A towards the end of the book, she’s basically a colonialist sympathizer who wrote The Sparrow “to show how very difficult fist contact would be, even with the benefit of hindsight”, which doesn’t sound to bad out of context right? Except she is literally talking about colonists (who she refers to as explores) and missionary activities in the Americas. If we’re being truthful about the history of the Americas, it’s very simple to get that colonization was not “unintentional” like in the situation of The Sparrow, but deliberately thought out and organized to commit genocide against Native Americans. But it’s important to understand although Emilio and the crew’s intentions may have been wholesome and the basis of building community, their actions were completely uneducated and I would say deplorable because they’re all professionals with research experience, it is borne from the same ignorance and lack of understanding as the genocide of colonists. It takes one intro to research ethnics course, which again MOST of the crew has experience in at this point before they make their voyage, to understand half of what they had done on Rakhat was not ethical at all. Their crew definitely lacked a social science and a basic sense of curiosity that didn’t center themselves. But then again what would you actually expect of the Catholic church and missionary voyage?
Not to mention all of the shocking “issues” that they found on Rakhat that they did not know how to deal with, were already present on earth. So what did they go to discover really? History repeated with a new face, they should have known better, the crew did not even understand their own history or the systems from which they were brought up under. They were absolutely ill-prepared to deal with any of these realities, which isn’t cautionary tale that Russell thinks this is because it still always centers whiteness and is underlyingly coded in this ignorance and complacency.
In terms of the characters, personally, I didn’t identify or relate to any of the characters in the friend group. I found myself being very annoyed during the scenes where characters personalities are shown and “developed” I did not find Sofia wasn’t really giving a full personality, which is a shame, and I’m pretty sure if you counted all the times Sofia was mentioned in the novel by the other characters, about 65% of it would be about her physical appearance and wether or not she was going to end up with Emilio or Jimmy. Very tired of seeing being one of the bigger aspects in the characterization of young single woman, I would have liked to have seen more from her. Out of everyone I would say that I liked Emilio the best but it’s hard not to connect with a character when they’re the protagonist, that’s kind of the whole point of writing a story from someone’s lens. In terms those chosen to go to Rakhat, the entire crew lacked humility, especially within the context of being a first contact for an entirely new culture. This is where I think I start to fault the author over the characters because it is more indicative of the author’s perception and world view which I would argue is extremely limited and doesn’t bother considering life and culture outside of Euro-centric view muchless show any interest in doing so. This is where part of my main problem with the entire book is.
In terms of “finding God”, I think the idea around what God is really vague and a bit hard to follow for me personally but I understand that this is a Catholic perspective. As a religious person, it does hurt me to see how this pure trust and love for God that Emilio had ended up being perverted and exploited, which has been the case for many on planet earth. The weight of that pain and wondering if God can ever be found again after such a thing is a valuable story and I would hope that Emilio, as everyone else who has a story like Emilio can find that peace in faith again.
I have not read Children of God, nor do I plan to, for me this book was enough to understand what ideas Russell is basing her story off of, and it’s not something that is new or revolutionary or something that I am interested in.
TLDR; Russell has no concept of actual colonial history and centers the entire book around a selfish western human perspective. Which sets the overall themes of the book in a way she herself doesn’t really understand or get. It’s not a great book for this reason and would have been an interesting concept if done by someone else.
This is a book which will stay with me forever. It is superbly crafted, the characters all so warm and well detailed that you could feel they are real friends, or that their experiences are entirely possible. If you have not read this book, you're missing out.
I picked up this book 3(or 4?) days ago, read its first page, and couldn't stop reading.
I was a little underwhelmed by the aliens (who weren't as alien or as unnerving as I'd expected, after comparisons to The Priest's Tale in Hyperion), but the tragic, poignant ending of this strange stunning tale that will continue to sit with me for a while more.
Tightly paced, with likeable characters.
I was a little underwhelmed by the aliens (who weren't as alien or as unnerving as I'd expected, after comparisons to The Priest's Tale in Hyperion), but the tragic, poignant ending of this strange stunning tale that will continue to sit with me for a while more.
Tightly paced, with likeable characters.
Just because there's a priest at the center of it all doesn't mean a good atheist like me can't enjoy the moral and ethical conflicts this book discusses or the plot's central mystery. All in a great sci-fi setting.
This is seriously one of the most depressing books I have ever read. That being said, I enjoyed it and couldn't put it down. But, yeah...not a feel good story.
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated